Three (3) Books on Nuclear Weapon Hoax
Folks, you can download three books on this subject here:
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/3mnzw04a24qsg/Nuclear_Hoax
1- Hiroshima Revisited by Michael Palmer (300 pages I cannot post it here)
2- Why Explosive Nuclear Devices May Not Exist by Jeremy James (posted)
3- The Bikini Atoll Nuclear Tests were Faked by by Miles Mathis (Posted)
—
Why Explosive Nuclear Devices May Not Exist
by Jeremy James
"There is a conspiracy of her [false] prophets in the midst thereof, like a roaring lion ravening the prey;
they have devoured souls..."
– Ezekiel 22:25
The ancient Greek mathematicians struggled for centuries to solve a problem which they did not realize had no solution. They were trying to "square the circle", that is to devise a valid method in geometry whereby, using only a ruler and compass, a square could be constructed whose enclosed area was exactly equal to the area enclosed by a given circle. The problem was very easy to understand, but the solution was unbelievably difficult to find. As it turned out, they could not discover a solution because there was none. What is more, it took over two thousand years before mathematicians were able to prove that the problem had no solution!
This is why the expression 'to square the circle' means to attempt the impossible.
Einstein is credited with discovering the famous equation, e=mc2, in 1905. However, the equation was already implied by Maxwell's equations, published in 1873, which describe the fundamental dynamics of electromagnetic radiation. (James Clerk Maxwell, a Scotsman and a born-again Christian, was probably the greatest physicist of all time.)
The equation, e=mc2, purports to express the amount of energy contained in a given amount of matter. In other words, if it were possible to convert matter into pure energy, this is the amount of energy that would be released. The amount is truly phenomenal, but it is also theoretical. The equation is not stating that matter can be converted instantaneously into pure energy, but only that, if it could, this is the amount that would probably be released.
We have been led to believe that this revolutionary transmutation was actually achieved on 16 July, 1945, when the Americans detonated the first nuclear fission device known as 'Trinity' in Alamogordo, New Mexico. We have also been led to believe that an explosive device, using nuclear fission, was deployed on two occasions under wartime conditions for strategic purposes. Our aim in this paper is to examine the evidence for this claim and whether the strategic targets in question, the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, were actually destroyed by nuclear weapons or by something else.
It took mankind over two thousand years to learn that the circle could not be 'squared'. In the meantime, however, mathematicians continued to devise proofs which they claimed were correct. No doubt these had their admirers until closer inspection revealed their hidden flaws. Time after time fresh attempts were made until, finally, in 1882, a German mathematician devised a proof which demonstrated conclusively that the problem had no solution.
It is doubtful whether man is capable to coming up with a method for converting matter into pure energy, as implied by e=mc2. In fact, the LORD may have so designed the fundamental laws of physics that such a catastrophic transmutation is not even possible. Perhaps some day an insightful physicist who will come along and prove that it cannot be done.
Hiroshima, 6 August, 1945
The building in the photo below was occupied by a branch of the Bank of Japan in 1945. It can still be seen today. In fact the photo is quite recent. The photo on the next page shows the same building as it appears in Google Street View (2015).
What is so special about this building, you may ask? Well, we are led to believe that 70 years ago a nuclear bomb exploded just 1800 feet above it.
The following map shows the location of the bank relative to the exact center of the nuclear blast:
Given that a nuclear bomb exploded only 1,300 feet away, how did the blast affect the building? See for yourself. The photo below was taken just three months later:
Apparently services at the bank resumed just two days after the blast!
And the current status of the building? It is used by the municipal authority of Hiroshima as a venue for cultural activities.
Here is another photo of the same building, this time just a few days after the blast. Note the large number of trees that were growing in front of it. Clearly nothing stood between the epicenter of the blast and the building itself, which was situated just 1,300 ft away! Remember also that the bomb exploded 1,800 ft above the ground.
A larger building, which was even closer to the epicenter of the blast, suffered extensive structural damage but a significant remnant withstood the force of the explosion:
This housed the Hiroshima chamber of industry and commerce (also known as The Commercial Museum). You can see where it was located on the map above [p.3] and its close proximity to ground zero – just 450ft away!
The following photo shows the building in its intact state before the blast:
Perplexing questions
These photos raise a number of very perplexing questions. How could any building within a quarter of a mile of a nuclear explosion remain substantially intact? How could any part of the structure of a building within 450ft of a nuclear explosion even remain standing? How could hundreds of trees directly beneath a nuclear explosion remain upright?
As one reads accounts of the damage caused by the blast, it is almost impossible to distinguish it from the damage caused by the firebombing of around seventy Japanese cities in the latter part of the war. If Hiroshima had not been subjected to a nuclear attack but had been firebombed instead, the visual evidence of its devastation would hardly have been any different. Eyewitness accounts, which had not been filtered through the US military apparatus, reported scenes in Hiroshima in the days following the explosion which, according to their testimony, were no different from the scenes of devastation that they had witnessed in other Japanese cities.
Photo of an ER62 cluster bomb containing a number of M69 firebombs manufactured by the Rockefeller company, Standard Oil.
To appreciate what this means, we need to consider the 'science' behind the large scale use of incendiary devices. Carpet bombing is a brutally destructive method of warfare. As an inhumane, Satanic device, the firebomb is hard to beat. It is designed to incinerate the target population – mostly women and children – and tear asunder the local infrastructure. The cluster-based napalm bomb that Rockefeller devised was specifically designed to destroy Japanese civilian houses, the majority of which were built of timber, even in the larger metropolitan areas. The burning napalm or gasoline gel which discharged on impact could travel up to 300ft and burn furiously on contact. In addition to napalm gel, incendiary devices could also contain magnesium, oil, thermite, or white phosphorous. Around 80 million pounds of napalm were manufactured by Rockefeller during the war, a large proportion of which was used to incinerate nearly seventy Japanese cities, including Tokyo, Osaka, Kobe, Nagoya, Tokushima, Yokahama, Toyama, Shizuoka, Kawasaki, Shimizu, Kuwana, Matsuyama, Imabari, Nobeoka, Omura, and Hamamatsu [See map overleaf].
Deceiving the American public
Given the extensive photographic, medical, radiological, and other evidence that is now available, it is clear that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were firebombed in a similar fashion. The only difference was that these two cities were the last to be firebombed and could therefore be cited for propaganda purposes as 'evidence' that a new type of explosive device had been developed. After all, these 'bombs' had brought an immediate end to the war, so they must have been 'special'.
Of course, the American public did not know that the Japanese high command had been seeking surrender terms for several months and were only facilitated by the Allies after the so-called atomic bombs had been dropped. American citizens were also largely unaware of the awful destruction caused by the firebombing of dozens of Japanese cities. They were never provided with photographic evidence of the devastation that firebombing can cause, therefore they assumed that the newsreel footage of the damage inflicted on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was irrefutable proof that nuclear devices had been used.
The nuclear arms race
As several historians have suggested, the alleged nuclear bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to convince the war-weary masses that mankind was now faced with an entirely new geopolitical threat and the real possibility of extinction. This gave rise to the nuclear arms race, the high political drama of the Cold War, and the horrifying prospect of 'mutual assured destruction'. Alas, the historians themselves believed the propaganda (or professed to do so). Only today, after so many high-level lies and deceptions have been exposed – lies by the military, by governments, by bankers, by the controlled media, and by amoral scientists in receipt of generous grants and emoluments – is the official account beginning to unravel.
Propaganda
When one looks at the official documentaries produced at the time, purporting to show the test site evidence and collateral damage, where houses and other structures were supposedly demolished by the explosive shock wave, they look decidedly amateurish. These propaganda newsreels were produced to convince the public that nuclear 'bombs' could actually work. This in turn gave rise to a massive industry, paid for entirely by American taxpayers. A small number of powerful industrialists made staggering profits on the back of this sinister subterfuge, while a phony 'Cold War' was created whereby even greater profits could be made through the accelerated production of conventional arms. The so-called test explosions conducted on Bikini Atoll and other remote sites were nothing more than hundreds of tons of high explosive, detonated from a distance. Since naive observers were generally assembled in the same location, a solar-powered 'flash' – using directional mirrors – could be timed to occur in tandem with the explosion.
Where is the radiation?
If these test explosions were genuine, the nuclear radiation produced would have posed a serious threat to life in the region. For example, when the meltdown occurred at Chernobyl in Belarus in 1986 (without a nuclear explosion), dangerous nuclear particles were supposed to have travelled as far as Norway, carried on ambient air currents. Given that the tests on Bikini Atoll and elsewhere involved the use of thermonuclear devices, hundreds of times more powerful than the devices that were allegedly used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the radiation transmitted into the atmosphere should have been detectable for years afterwards and should have caused severe genetic damage to life in the region. And yet, significantly, there is not the slightest evidence that anything of the kind occurred.
Nuclear missiles and floppy disks
It was widely reported in January, 2014, that the 450 or so Minuteman missiles, which are secreted – ready-for-action – in silos across America, each armed with a nuclear warhead, are activated by computer instructions stored on an 8-inch floppy disk. Think about this for a moment. If the survival of the entire United States could at some point depend on the immediate activation of these missiles, then why are they critically dependant on technology that is 30 years out of date? How many computer systems that depend on floppy disks will reliably work after just five years, not to mention thirty? Silos are cold damp places in the depths of winter. It is incomprehensible – unless the missiles were never intended for use in the first place! If that is the case, then the entire charade actually makes sense.
Firestorms
The carpet-bombing of wooden buildings with thousands of napalm incendiary devices creates a huge firestorm. The gases produced in the conflagration reach such a high temperature that they explosively ignite, causing shock waves that are powerful enough to demolish buildings in the immediate vicinity. Generally speaking, the only structures that are able to withstand this combination of heat and pressure are those made of reinforced concrete.
The photo overleaf – which depicts the dropping of thousands of incendiaries on Toyama – shows how easily an entire city can be utterly destroyed by intensive firebombing.
The next six photos [1-6] show the aftermath of the firebombing campaign conducted against several Japanese cities. The scenes depicted do not differ in any significant way from those depicted in photos 7 and 8.
The firebombing of Toyama [aerial view]
Tokushima
Tokyo
Shizuoka
Hamamatsu
Kobe
Osaka
Hiroshima
Nagasaki
Tianjin, 2015
The explosions at an industrial site in Tianjin, China, on 12 August 2015, which was widely reported in the media, caused extensive damage and created an enormous blast crater:
According to CNN and the BBC, seismographs revealed that the two explosions had a combined explosive magnitude of 24 tons of TNT:
"The first explosion was huge, and the second was even more powerful: the equivalent of 21 metric tons of TNT or a magnitude-2.9 earthquake, according to the China Earthquake Networks Center." – CNN Report, 14 August 2015, by By Will Ripley, Steven Jiang and Jethro Mullen [http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/13/asia/china-tianjin-explosions/]
"The China Earthquake Networks Centre said the magnitude of the first explosion was the equivalent of detonating three tons of TNT, while the second was the equivalent of 21 tonnes of the explosive." – BBC Report, China blasts: Tianjin port city rocked by explosions, 13 August 2015 [http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-33896292]
Seismographs of the two explosions in Tianjin
[http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/212093-massive-explosion-devastates- chinese-port-city-of-tianjin-hundreds-injured]
According to The Telegraph, "The explosion was so powerful it was registered as seismic activity by the US Geological Survey at a monitoring station 90 miles away in Beijing." – Nicola Davison, Telegraph, 13 August 2015
When one considers the damage caused by these explosions and the size of the resulting blast crater – over 600 feet in diameter – it is sobering to realize that this was all caused by just 24 tons of TNT. The atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima had an explosive power equivalent 15,000 tons of TNT. In other words it was over 600 times more powerful, and yet it left no blast crater and failed to completely demolish a building that was just 450ft away.
It is curious also that many eyewitnesses in Tianjin compared the blast to that of a nuclear explosion. Indeed it even produced the fantastic flash that one normally associates with a nuclear blast:
Tianjin 'flash' – the photos are shown in chronological sequence
The 'nuclear bomb' analogy even extends to the production of a 'mushroom cloud':
Given the absence of both nuclear radiation and a powerful electromagnetic pulse (EMP), the Tianjin explosion(s) were not caused by a nuclear device. On the other hand, if the cause was not chemical, it was probably a high-speed kinetic rod of some kind, projected at Mach 10 or thereabouts from a rail-gun in the upper atmosphere. This kind of technology was not available in 1945 (as far as we know), but the Allies had the necessary technology during WW2 to produce powerful thermobaric devices. Such a device, exploded two thousand feet or so above Hiroshima, would have produced the huge 'flash' that was reported (if the reports are reliable) and a very powerful shock wave (which would demolish concrete buildings), as well as causing extensive fire damage and the gruesome incineration of human bodies. Since a thermobaric bomb also consumes all of the oxygen in the surrounding atmosphere, it creates a massive vacuum which can suck out lungs and eyeballs. Such phenomena were reported by the Japanese after Hiroshima and Nagasaki but denied by the US military.
A kinetic rod launched from a rail-gun device in the upper atmosphere could also be used to simulate a meteor strike. A co-ordinated series of such explosions would create a state of extreme panic in any advanced economy, including America, and could be used as a trigger event for the imposition of martial law.
A very powerful lie
A detailed analysis of the large body of evidence that either refutes or contradicts the popular belief in the existence of nuclear weapons would go far beyond the scope of this paper. Instead, we must confine our case to the facts already presented and invite readers to consider the wider context in which such weapons were supposedly developed.
It should be noted, for example, that the emergence of a new type of destructive weapon at the close of World War II made it much easier to engineer the conditions needed to create World War III. This weapon could then be redesigned on an ongoing basis until its collective destructive power was supposedly great enough to destroy the earth itself. This planted in the thoughts and imagination of all mankind the belief that man now possessed the ability to undo all that God had done when He created the world. In a perverse and unexpected way man – with god-like genius – had transcended the confines of Biblical truth and needed a new or higher truth to constrain his ambitions.
This is a very powerful lie. The possibility of mutually assured destruction gave birth to the widespread belief that some form of world government would be needed to maintain international peace. It paved the way for the creation of the United Nations, which was formally established in October, 1945, just two months after the so-called atomic bombs were dropped.
Seeing through the illusion
The two cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, were reoccupied just days after the 'atomic' bombs exploded. Seemingly, as far as the local population was concerned, there were few if any reported health risks from lethal radiation, either at the time or in the months and years thereafter. Most health conditions related to napalm burns – which often required years of clinical treatment – or the inhalation of toxic pollutants produced by incendiary devices.
Journalists were banned from visiting the city for months afterwards and from interviewing eyewitnesses. For reasons of 'national security', every nuclear test since 1945 has been conducted on terrain that is off-limits to the public, so no independent inspection of the aftermath of these supposed explosions has ever been conducted.
The vast majority of people will reject the idea that explosive nuclear devices do not exist. But true Christians should at least be aware that the Father of Lies will use every possible illusion and deception to strengthen his hold on mankind and prepare the way for the arrival of his 'son', the Antichrist:
"And the conspiracy was strong; for the people increased continually with Absalom." (2 Samuel 15:12)
Does this mean that 'nuclear' devices will never be used? Unfortunately there exists a different category of explosive ordnance, known as the fuel-air bomb or thermobaric device, which can have an enormously destructive impact in a confined area. Twenty or thirty such devices could create a shock wave so destructive that it would utterly devastate a large part of a medium-sized city. If the military leaders declared afterwards that the city had been destroyed by a nuclear explosion, there would be few, if any, to question their assertion, especially if the area was later seeded with radioactive material.
Jeremy James Ireland
August 30, 2015
For further information visit www.zephaniah.eu
Copyright Jeremy James 2015
The Bikini Atoll Nuclear Tests were Faked by by Miles Mathis
First published June 14, 2014
The first Bikini Atoll nuclear tests took place in 1946, we are told. The Bikini Atoll is part of the Marshall Islands in the East Indies. The tests were the first since the bombs dropped in Japan in 1945. Two tests took place, called Able and Baker. Both were about 23 kilotonnes. For reference, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was said to be 15 kt. They were detonated just 3.5 miles or 5.6 kilometers from shore.
The first strange thing to note is that the encyclopedia sites can't figure out when either test took place. On the same page, Wikipedia tells us they took place on June 30 and July 24, or July 1 and July 25. It looks like they could get the story straight, after 68 years. I will be told that one is local time and one is UTC, but we don't need both times. Choose one.
Since we have photos of both detonations, it is easy to study the two for continuity. Unfortunately, there is no continuity. The second photo disproves the first.
Here is Able, which took place first:
Here is Baker, 24 days later:
We will look at the ships in close-up in a moment, but the first thing you should notice is the little huts on the shore, and the palm trees.
That is a close-up of Baker. Also notice the little sunning deck, about 10 feet out in shallow water. Doesn't look too sturdy, does it? So how did these wicker structures survive the first blast? The little trees didn't lose a leaf after the Able detonation. Compare that tree near center to the same tree pre- Able. Exactly the same fronds in the same positions. You will say the tree on the far right has lost all its fronds, but check the Able photo again: it didn't have any to begin with. A real nuclear bomb detonated that nearby should have caused not only a tsunami, swamping this entire beach, it should have also caused a heavy wind. I remind you of the Nevada Trinity test films, with the wind ripping across the film sites miles away.
Those soldiers are said to be six miles from the blast, so the beach at Bikini Atoll was about twice as close. You can watch the wind from the Nevada Trinity blast here. [Trinity's detonation was about the
same size as Able and Baker.] There you can see the surge that should have been caused in both water and air by the Able and Baker detonations. And yet somehow that beach on the Bikini Atoll is exactly the same before and after the Able detonation.
I also urge you to study the black and white stripes painted on the trees in the Able and Baker photos. What are those for, you should ask. They are there to measure the water surge. The stripes act as a simple flood meter.
So the people involved apparently want you to think they are expecting a surge, but then they forget to fake the signs of one. If there had been a surge after Able, we should see some sign of it in the Baker photo. But we don't. No lines appear on the trees. Even more damning is that we see no sand piled up in front of the trees (toward the beach). If there had been any wave caused by the blast, the sand would have piled up around the trunk of the tree.
You will say, “No, no, they swept that all away, to start fresh for the second test.” Right. And did they also rebuild the little structures in exactly the same configuration and same place, down to matching the sticks and the holes in the roofs?
Now let's look at the ships. This is a close-up of Baker, taken from a 5137 x 2696px photo, so it has a lot of resolution.
I copied that with enough resolution that you can zoom in even more in this pdf if you want to. If you think those black ships look real, I don't know what to say. They shouldn't be black, for a start. The nearer ships are lit from this side, so why aren't the bigger ships? But an even better question is this: if you think they are black because they have been charred by the blast, tell me why they weren't swamped by the blast? Why are they just sitting there upright? Again, they should have been hit by a strong surge in both air and water. Whoever faked this photo has tried to indicate the surge by whitening the water out in a circle, but the surge should be far stronger than that. As we see from the Trinity blasts, the detonation shouldn't just throw water and air up, it should also throw both water and air out to all sides. A wave should be coming right at us here, in both water and air. So this photo has no continuity with the Trinity films, as well as no continuity with physics or logic.
Remember, Baker was detonated underwater—halfway down to the sea floor—so why would it create this gigantic water spout up, but no wave to the side? We should see a large concentric water wave moving out from the blast, but we don't.
When that huge spout of water and sea-floor sediment that we see going up came back down, we would get a second gigantic wave, possibly even larger than the first. And yet we are told that only 10 of 78 ships in the area were sunk. That makes no sense.
You will say that none of the stuff going up will come down, since it is all vaporized. But the stuff in the spout isn't vapor. If it were vapor, it would look like the vapor above it. That is vapor. We don't know what the stuff in the spout is, but to me it looks like a cat's scratching post. Let's zoom in a bit more:
First, study the edge of the spout, where it meets the background. Doesn't look right, does it? It looks like one photo was superimposed on top of another, sort of like they do with greenscreen now.
Next, stare at the spout itself for a moment. Looks a lot like carpet, doesn't it? Is that a nuclear spout, or a cat's scratching post?
That's one brave kitty cat. And this gives a whole new meaning to “carpet bombing.” Here's another picture of the Baker detonation:
So many problems there it is hard to know where to start. First of all, the spout doesn't match the other spout. The spout here is larger at the bottom and tapers up; the other doesn't. This spout is surrounded by white foam; the other isn't. If you answer that this photo is a few seconds later, allowing these things to change and develop, then you have to answer this, too: How did the white cloud above get smaller? If this is a few seconds later, allowing the white foam below to develop, why hasn't the vapor cloud above expanded? The top of the cloud, containing the broccoli shapes, has expanded, so why would the white vapor halo beneath that have contracted? They forgot to match the photos to one another.
The ships here are also too big. We are at least three times farther away, but the ships next to the foam haven't diminished in size proportionally. Another problem is the fall-off of light from right to left across the photo. See how the right side is bright and the left side is dark? Whoever faked this photo was trying to match the shadows on the sailors, which—as we can see—fall to the left. The sailors are bright to the right and dark to the left. But there wouldn't be a shadow on the ocean as a whole. The sun to the right won't cast a shadow to the left on the ocean! Just go outside in a field or on the beach or on the ocean or on a lake, in the morning or evening when the sun is to your right. Then see if it is darker overall to your left. I will tell you: it isn't.
Finally, we have sailors watching without protective clothing, goggles, or—in at least one case—a shirt. Even if these guys are ten miles out, this makes no sense. The blast is traveling out through the air. The expanding event doesn't magically stop ten miles out, or even twenty, and they knew that at the time. Do you honestly think they knew enough about radiation and fission to build a successful bomb, but not enough to know how the event would travel through air? Even if they were so stupid or
careless they couldn't figure that out from equations, the earlier tests in Nevada would have told them that. The mushroom in Nevada was said to have traveled out many dozens of miles, and that was just the visible cloud. This was also after the events in Japan, where they tell us they saw the effects of radiation firsthand. So you have to be an idiot to accept this picture as real.
Here's a third photo of the Baker event, from the air:
As you can see, it doesn't match either of the previous two. The overall shape of the halo is completely different in all three photos. Beyond that, the ambient cloud cover isn't even close to matching. Here we have a very few tiny wispy clouds. In the second picture, we had lots of medium sized cumulus clouds. And in the first picture, we had a mostly cloudy sky.
You will tell me that in the previous pictures, we see signs that the blast blew the local clouds out of the near vicinity. In the first picture, we saw some clearing above the blast. But it has to be one or the other: either the blast will clear the clouds or it won't. There is no halfway, as we see in this last photo. We should have a super strong wind, right? If the clouds are blown away, you wouldn't expect to see a few wispy, very light clouds remaining. How did these little clouds dodge the wind?
For more proof, we can go to Google. You can get a picture of the Bikini Atoll today from Google Earth.
That's dated 2013, not 1945. We are told the locals can't live there now because of radioactivity, but we see at least three proofs against that. One, we see lots of plant life both on and offshore. Radioactivity affects plants just as it affects animals, so the island should be barren. Remember, the Bikini Atoll wasn't said to be blasted by only Able and Baker. It was blasted 23 times, including three of the biggest blasts ever from US testing: the 4.5 megaton Navajo and the 5 megaton Tewa, in 1956; and the 15 megaton Bravo in 1954. Bravo was therefore 750 times more powerful than Baker. Multiply the Baker mushroom by 750 times. Since the average elevation of Bikini is only 7 feet above low tide, a blast that size inside the atoll would have sunk the entire island under a boiling sea of radiation. They admit that the crater from Bravo on the sea floor “is 2,200 yards across and 80 yards deep, shaking islands more than 120 miles away.” That's a crater more than a mile and a quarter across. The heat created was almost 100,000o F, which is 9 times hotter than the surface of the Sun. The fireball was nearly five miles wide, and the mushroom rose to 60 miles.
But get this: just 10 years after the last nuclear blast there in 1958, the original residents were allowed to go back to Bikini. It was only after finding high levels of Strontium 90 in crabs that they were removed again. I beg you to read that closely, since it is stated in just that way at Wikipedia. They wanted to go back, they did go back, and the only reason they couldn't stay was because of radiation tests on crabs? You have to be kidding me! The place should have looked worse than the surface of the Moon and been completely uninhabitable. The natives would have burst into tears and told the ship to turn around and get them out of there. Instead, they landed and began living there, only to be removed after tests. We are told that crops were replanted in 1968, and grew!
Beyond that, we see something is planted there in rows. Who planted it? Does that seem like a good place to plant a crop? Do you think that crop was planted by guys in radiation suits?
Finally, look at all the well maintained roads. Do you think those are left over from 56 years ago? I will be told the US Army is using the Atoll to test radiation-tolerant plants. If so, the test looks incredibly successful. Whatever they have injected into the plants and soil they should inject into themselves, to make radiation-tolerant people.
Oh, and don't forget the radiation-tolerant cat:
In 2008, the Daily Mail in London admitted that sea life in and around the atoll is abundant, with huge coral trees growing underwater and schools of fish swimming in the mile-wide Bravo “crater.” What's more, Wikipedia admits that diving tours have been given there since 1998. Do they swim in lead suits? Oh, they don't need to because nuclear contamination can't move through sea water, and doesn't last for decades. Wrong. Just ask yourself this: is that what they are telling you about Fukushima: the sea water is blocking all release of radiation and it will only last a few years? No. If that were the case, Los Alamos National Laboratory could just throw all its high-level waste into the oceans. Why do you think they go to the trouble of burying that waste at great depths in unpopulated areas? Because according to the mainstream story, it will be hot for centuries. High-level waste has a very long half- life, and while it is true that decommissioned bombs aren't said to be as big a problem, it isn't decommissioned bombs were are talking about here. It is exploded bombs. In exploded bombs—as in
reactor cores—very high heats have been created, as well as large amount of fission. Over 42 megatons of fission yield were detonated in Bikini from 1946 to 1958. It is for this reason that the stories don't add up. We are being told many contradictory things. If all these giant hydrogen bombs had actually been detonated there, the Bikini Atoll should not be now be green and cultivated, the coral and fish should not thrive there, no diving tours should be given there, and no natives should have ever returned, even for a moment.
Also consider this: if the Bravo blast had really created surface temperatures of 100,000F in a fireball five miles wide, that heat would have to dissipate in all directions, through all media. The sea would have boiled for many miles and the atmosphere would have been scorched for many more. The landmass of the Atoll would have been in or near the edge of that initial fireball, so we should ask what happens to land that is heated to that degree. Even if the temperature had dropped by a factor of ten at that distance from center, that would still indicate a temperature of the land of 10,000F, which is the temperature they now give to the core of the Earth. If you heat land to that temperature and then let it cool, you wouldn't expect it to just return to its original form, would you? If you heat sand and rocks and dirt to that temperature, it melts. In fact, it melts at about 1/5th that temperature, creating magma. When it cools, it is then igneous rock. But the surface of the Bikini Atoll is still limestone and sand. Limestone melts at 1,500F, which is 67 times cooler than the temperature said to be created by Bravo. Sand normally melts at above 2,000F, so we should also see the beaches at Bikini turned to glass. We don't.
So what does this faking indicate? I would say it indicates one of two things*: either the entire nuclear program has been faked to keep your ass under the desk, ducked and covered; or the nuclear program is real but our military didn't wish to cause this amount of real destruction on our lovely home planet Earth. Those who are familiar with the scruples of the military wouldn't bet on the second possibility, seeming to leave us with the first. However, the second possibility may have a variation: perhaps the military wasn't allowed to run these tests. That implies someone or something which has the power to disallow the military from doing things, which leads us into other problems. I will leave that problem unsolved for now, only giving you a pointer, which is this: either someone behind our own government is more benevolent than we think, or someone behind the Russian government is more benevolent (and powerful) than we think, or the apparent benevolence we see here comes from some hidden third party. Whatever explanation you choose to embrace should give you a surge of hope. Things may be bad, but they may not be quite as bad as the story we have been sold. The fact that our government has long been faking so many events gives you no reason to trust them, but it beats the hell of the events being real. Given the choice of an honest government and terrible real events or a dishonest government and terrible fake events, I will take the second any day.
*I will be told there is a third possibility: they wanted pictures to act as propaganda, but couldn't shield the film from gamma radiation, even ten miles out. So the events were real but they had to fake the pictures. That explanation may hold near ground zero, where no film (especially video) camera could possibly work. But at a distance of many miles, that explanation falls apart. Ionizing radiation from a blast is said to be only 5% of the total energy, which drops by the square with distance. So while you wouldn't want to be standing there for any amount of time, a camera with a fast shutter speed should have a high probability of capturing some visible light without also capturing a fatal gamma ray. The Russian's Tsar Bomba picture was taken 100 miles out, so they shouldn't have had to fake that. But they did.